Ann Canedy, Precinct 1

Ann Canedy

Friday

Jul 15, 2011 at 2:00 AM

By now, many of you are familiar with the contract "no cause" clause, which is part of the Amendment to the Contract offered to the Town Manager.

By now, many of you are familiar with the contract “no cause” clause, which is part of the Amendment to the Contract offered to the Town Manager. This clause was inserted into the Contract Amendment by the Town Manager during the negotiation process, a process which I thought was entered into and was being conducted in good faith. This clause was negotiated through a subcommittee of the Town Manager’s own choosing and is typical of employee contracts.

You are also familiar with the letter sent by the Town Manager’s attorney. Not withstanding, his public comments on TV, the radio and in print, it appears that he may be preparing to file a wrongful termination action.

I take both of those things very seriously.

I also take seriously the Town organizational chart, which lists Citizens of Barnstable on the top rung, elected Town Council on the second rung and appointed town manager on the third rung.

My commitment to the citizens of this community compels me to attempt to the best of my ability to explain to you what in fact has occurred. Despite these above suggestions to the contrary, press coverage indicates that the seven councilors (three who are attorneys), say there is no reason why I cannot speak freely. The Town Manager narrows that down a little bit and says there is no reason why we cannot talk about matters of “differences in philosophy or managerial skills.” I will take that in hope that that is true and I am not in fact inviting a legal action against the Council as a whole, part of the Council or me.

Philosophy: With all due respect, while I would be interested in philosophical discussions with the manager and have had philosophical discussions with the manager, his philosophy is not really germane in this form of government. Philosophy, policy, strategic planning are the purview of this elected Town Council. The Town Manager is an employee who carries out that philosophy, policy, strategic planning. He is not elected. We do not have a mayor. We have no elected executive branch. The Town Manager manages at the direction of the whole council, which is elected and which is the legislative branch.

The manager no matter who he/she is does not set policy or should not; his/her philosophy should not enter into governing whatsoever. This is not a political position or shouldn’t be. It’s a managerial position.

This is one reason I don’t particularly like the format of the State of the Town Address. Sure the pageantry is appealing to some people and I applaud the honoring of exemplary citizens. However the State of the Town, the philosophy, the policy, the direction, the strategic plan comes from or should come from the Town Council. It should be the Town Council President’s role to deliver this to you on behalf of the Council.

Managerial skills: I will not elaborate on specifics, but there are a number of issues which have occurred over the years the handling of which has been problematic to me: the Hyannis harbormaster’s building, Village Green (a proposed affordable housing project in the Industrial park), Barnstable Harbor bulkhead (there is a “before” to that story), roads, town-owned buildings such as Trayser Museum, land-based wind turbine energy policy, the Railway Blufffs property acquisition proposal, the sewer issue, relationships of committees and boards (ZBA – remember that?) to name a few.

From the dais, Councilor Farnham and I have regularly asked for accountings of appropriated projects upon completion to include disposition of monies unspent. Until this week, I have never received a response.

The Press and the majority councilors would have you believe this came out of left field – just happened last week. If your only source of news is the Cape Cod Times, I can see where you might believe that one. They don’t cover these meetings unless there is controversy. But if you read the Patriot, the Enterprise, the Register, watch town council meetings, interface with your councilors, your civic associations, you would realize that this is not an overnight thing for some of us.

Council President stated recently that there are a lot of side issues that maybe you should all discount because this one is the only important issue before us. I respectfully disagree. Many of these side issues may or may not be part of this issue. I don’t know. In regards to the dismissal of the town council administrator, I have asked for a public meeting, an executive session meeting, a retreat – whatever it would take to resolve that issue. As far back as February or March, I stated that this is a crucial issue that I for one am having trouble getting past. I have asked question after question with no answer or conflicting answers. I want to know the truth – that’s all.

There have been protestations from some councilors as to why the vote on the amendment to the Town Manager’s contract was taken when the full council was not present. There was a very important discussion on the agenda on that issue the meeting before that vote. Two councilors came in to that prior meeting, cast a vote against an inquiry into the departure of the town council administrator, and left. One did not attend the meeting at all. Ask them why they were not present or left?

The very next meeting was a Special Meeting set by the Town Council President. Presumably he knew who could attend and who could not. He could have set that meeting for any time; waited for a full council himself. He was in control. He did not share information with me that two councilors could not attend and their reasons. Therefore I could not know at the time of the vote whether those councilors were not there by design or choice. Bottom line: all councilors were notified, some for whatever reason decided not to attend, the Town Council President had that information in advance, the meeting proceeded with a quorum present and a valid vote was taken.

Recently Councilor Joakim filed an open meeting law complaint. She didn’t cite any reference to the Open Meeting Law so that we would know what part of the Law we supposedly violated and there was not one scintilla of evidence – just conjecture. But there it is all over the Cape Cod Times: “Illegal voting bloc.” If I read that and I was you, I would be mad too.

Interestingly that article was corrected to include me in that complaint. Interesting because I was in fact was sitting right next to Councilor Joakim at that executive session and did not break quorum as alleged.

But what “illegal voting bloc” are we really talking about? I don’t know because nine councilors constitute a quorum. The Town Manager and others have cast this as an unredeemable fractured Council whose difficulties stem from the November elections. I could care less about the past November elections and the truth is, we have stood together on many more issues than not. I stood with Councilor Barry on piers and docks. Close vote. We prevailed. I stood with councilors Rugo, Joakim and Chirigotis on the Centerville DCPC. Close vote. We prevailed. Several years ago, I presented a DCPC for Pond Village in Barnstable. Close vote. That did not prevail. We all move on from these votes. There have been close votes in the past and there will be close votes in the future. That is the way it should be. No one wants a rubber stamp council…or do you?

Are any of these past votes the result of “illegal voting blocs?” I received phone calls and was lobbied on those issues by some of the very same councilors now complaining about this process. Illegal? No, not at all.

Are we referring perhaps to the bloc of seven majority of councilors who blocked an inquiry or an investigation into the so called departure of the town council administrator? Or are we talking about the bloc of six minority of councilors who voted in favor of that inquiry/investigation?

In this process of offering an amendment to the Town Manager’s contract, six have expressed that they are in favor and seven are against. With a majority presumably against, the Town Manager’s amended contract should never have come out of subcommittee, Executive Session or been approved. But in this case, strangely, this is not what occurred. Instead this has been made into a political agenda and I don’t know whose.

Process: Matters of contract of an employee are private. If the town manager was the mayor you could elect or not elect. But the town manager is not the mayor, he is an employee. Therefore these deliberations are closed, by state law for his protection. Most of those executive session minutes have been released. One has not and there are very important reasons for that.

What has been private and behind closed doors is a series of meetings by the so called Barnstable Coalition for Fair Government. Do you have a right to meet as citizens? Of course you do. This Coalition is interesting however in its make up and its origin. It has been broadcasted on Facebook, using a Barnstable Town All American City logo, a logo that I would imagine is trademarked and one that appears on Town stationary and website. In my view, the use of that logo so closely identified with the Town, could be construed as the misuse of municipal resources for political purposes.

Supposedly this Coalition is interested in “open government” and “transparency.” However, at first, their postings listed a time and place for these meetings. Those postings were quickly taken down and replaced with only a time given. Attendance was by invitation only and persons interested in attending were directed to a g-mail e-mail address. Are people screened for attendance? Only the like minded allowed? The press was barred from these meetings. Open? Transparent? I think not.

What happened at these meetings attended by 30 to 40 people? At least one councilor told me she was attending and was asked to speak. The stated mission of this group is to oust five councilors in November; one by recall, and four by scaring up some opponents; opponents with one agenda and one agenda only. Political manipulation at its worst.

I would never interfere with another councilor’s election. That’s for you to decide. And yet my defeat and the defeat of others are being actively touted from this dais and beyond. (I direct you to statements made on the June 24th telecasts on the Town-owned, Town-controlled Channel 18.) I defended Councilor Joakim on her two recalls and Councilor Milne on his one. The knife in my back should be visible to all of you.

You don’t like the way this government is set up? I don’t either. The charter recently defeated in my view is not the answer; it just sets up the same dynamic only more convoluted, again in my view. Perhaps we should consider a return to Town Meeting and a selectmen form of government, or perhaps we should have an elected town council and a mayor.

Right now, this is the form of government you‘ve got. In my view, you are being played and I am being played. The mother of all smack downs.